Re: last call on Raptor publication

Hello Mike;

Thanks for this clarification.

With this revision, I support Option "a".

Regards
Marshall

On Jun 6, 2006, at 5:47 PM, Mike Luby wrote:

> Marshall,
>
> What DF proposes to do is to revise the DF IPR statement for Raptor in
> RMT and add language along lines that Mark outlined in his original
> email (which appears at the bottom of this email), i.e.
>
> "Although Digital Fountain is not able to offer RAND terms independent
> of market and application, Digital Fountain offers RAND terms for
> specific standards such as 3GPP MBMS and DVB-H IPDC, and intends to
> offer RAND terms for additional specific standards in the future."
>
> Regards, Mike
>
>
> From: Marshall Eubanks [[email protected]]
> Sent: Tuesday, June 06, 2006 8:38 AM
> To: Lorenzo Vicisano
> Cc: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [Rmt] last call on Raptor publication
>
> Can I inquire just what the DF IPR statement actually is ?
>
> The draft
> http://www3.ietf.org/proceedings/05aug/IDs/draft-ietf-rmt-bb-fec-
> raptor-object-01.txt
> says
>
> 8.  Intellectual Property
>
>     Digital Fountain does have intellectual property rights associated
>     with the technology described in this document, and intends to
>     provide a full IPR statement specific to this document to the IETF
>     that will satisfy the requirements of the IETF.
>
> (BTW, this draft is apparently no longer on the RMT charter page under
> any version.)
>
> Digging I find this
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/public/ipr_detail_show.cgi?ipr_id=702
> with
>
> The Patent Holder states that its position with respect to  
> licensing any
> patent claims contained in the patent(s) or patent application(s)
> disclosed above that would necessarily be infringed by  
> implementation of
> the technology required by the relevant IETF specification ("Necessary
> Patent Claims"), for the purpose of implementing such  
> specification, is
> as follows(select one licensing declaration option
> only):
> Unwilling to Commit to the Provisions.
> -----
>
> Is there an actual IPR statement ? I thought that there was, but I am
> perturbed not to be able to find one. I am talking to SMPTE people  
> about
> this and have nothing really I can show them.
>
> If there is not, then I would change my support to be in favor of  
> option
> c, "experimental"
>
> Regards
> Marshall
>
>
>
> On Jun 5, 2006, at 3:14 PM, Lorenzo Vicisano wrote:
>
>> As you know, Digital Fountain changed the IPR statement for the  
>> FEC ID
>
>> Raptor (draft-ietf-rmt-bb-fec-raptor-object) withdrawing the "RAND"
>> terms (please see the email that Mark Watson sent to this list,
>> attached below).
>>
>> This thread is to settle once for all the position of the RMT WG on
>> this issue, in particular regarding whether and how the WG wants to
>> sponsor raptor for publication.
>>
>> We have the options of:
>>
>>   a) asking the IESG to publish raptor as a Standard-Track document
>>      (as originally planned).
>>   b) abandoning raptor as a WG standard
>>   c) asking the IESG to publish raptor as experimental or
>>      informational. Note that this might create problems with the
>>      IANA allocation of FEC IDs etc.
>>
>> This issue was already discussed on this list and at the last IETF
>> meeting (Dallas). So far we have had some comments in favor of option
>> a) and no comments against it.
>>
>> Please express your opinion by June 19th. If we have no feedback by
>> then, we will assume that the WG wishes to go for a), given the
>> previous discussions.
>>
>> 	thank you,
>> 	Lorenzo
>>
>> ################# Mark's email attached below #######################
>>
>> All,
>>
>>
>>
>> As most of you are aware, Digital Fountain has to date been promoting
>> our core technology, DF Raptor, as an open standard in IETF RMT and
>> elsewhere, for any and all applications.  This mail is to let you  
>> know
>
>> about a change to that strategy: As a result of a recent, significant
>> new relationship that is crucial to Digital Fountain with a prime
>> contractor in the defense industry, our approach going forward  
>> will be
>
>> to promote Raptor as an open standard for specific markets and
>> applications  including of course 3GPP and DVB standards where Raptor
>> has already been adopted and others in future.
>>
>>
>>
>> However, this means revising the IPR statement that we have made to
>> the IETF regarding draft-ietf-rmt-bb-fec-raptor-object because,  
>> whilst
>
>> we still offer RAND terms for specific standards such as 3GPP and  
>> DVB,
>
>> we are no longer able to offer RAND terms independent of market and
>> application.
>>
>>
>>
>> Going forward, there are several options regarding
>> draft-ietf-rmt-fec-raptor-object, including not publishing it at all.
>> This is of course a decision for the IETF and Digital Fountain will
>> not take a position in that discussion.
>>
>>
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>>
>>
>> Mark Watson
>>
>> Digital Fountain
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Rmt mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rmt
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Rmt mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rmt
>
>